Mayor orders man removed after he didn't stand for Pledge of Allegiance

[progree]

128. Please read #125

[font color = blue] >>Richardson was NOT required to stand for the prayer. He was required to stand for the pledge<<[/font]

SO WHAT! That he wasn't required to stand for one theological exercise but not another doesn't suddenly change applicable law, namely the Establishment Clause of the Constitution of the United States of America. It doesn't suddenly change being forced to stand for the Pledge from a mixed speech/religion issue to solely a free speech issue. And please see in #125 the mayor's apparent reason for treating them differently is because the invocation was already underway, and he apparently finally decided to let it continue rather than push the standing issue at this point.

[font color = blue]>>Had he been forced to stand for a prayer, then I would agree that it is a mixed religion/speech issue because it would be both forced speech and forced participation in a religious exercise. <<[/font]

I'm glad you are acknowledging that being forced to stand for a prayer may be a violation of the Establishment Clause. Now why isn't being forced to stand for a theocratic declaration (the Pledge) not a violation of the Establishment Clause?

As for your last 2 paragraphs about possible violations of Greece -- I agree, but note that none of that was in FFRF's article. Rather, they emphasized the being forced to stand or participate in both the invocation and the Pledge, and not at all whether they violated any of Greece's guidelines of what is a proper prayer and/or who is giving the prayer.

http://ffrf.org/news/news-releases/item/21252-atheist-group-condemns-mayor-police-chief-for-ejecting-citizen-who-refused-to-stand-for-prayer